|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Aug 4, 2017 9:42:44 GMT
Fans are part of the solution for any club, Blackpool have lost the goodwill of their fans, Coventry have lost the goodwill of their fans and our owners will too if they refuse to communicate and treat with respect the fans who were here before them and will be here after them no matter how well they do or the mess they leave behind. The title of the thread is deliberately provocative. If they want to be treated with respect they need to do the same to us on such an important issue as the collapse of the most important project in the history of the club. My beef if you actually read what I've said as opposed to just the headline is the contemptuous lack of communication. If they come out today or any other day and explain what the true position is, that will show integrity, we can then ALL (not just the see no evil brigade) rally behind them ag if we have faith in their answers. For the good of our football club we shouldn't just blindly support whoever owns us, we should always question because I guarantee you that anyone who is a committed supporter will absolutely have the best interests of the FC as their motive. Unfortunately we cannot say that about everyone that owns football clubs. Fair enough, but undermining the owners is only useful if they are bad owners. If they are good owners they need to be backed. If they are endeavouring to negotiate difficult issues with entities that don't give a f**k about the club then they need to be backed. I don't believe you get to undermine them on a whim and then back them on a whim, depending on the time of day or the particular issue. You either back them or don't. And you have chosen not to, and you have chosen to insult them. I suppose, as you have tagged them fake and believe they are bad for the club then you should continue to call them names and undermine them at every opportunity until you get rid of them. Not sure how you have come to this conclusion (on the say-so of some randomer at UWE I guess). But you go for it. If you feel they need to be brought down, then despise them and undermine them for all you're worth; go for it. Meanwhile, I will back them until I get some sort of evidence that they are bad for the club. All I have got so far is that they are good for the club, and want us to succeed. All I have got is that they are not prepared to dump a shedload of cash down the sh**ter following the half-baked 'watertight' plans that they had nothing to do with and that have already been discredited on a number of points. Wow what a hysterical tirade! Show me where I have said I'm not going to back them or I despise them. This is not black and white, or love and hate not much is. Unilateral support for anyone who runs anything is unhealthy and dangerous in fact its sycophantic. Equally opposition for the sake of it is destructive too. Up until now though I have been big a supporter of the AQ's I still back them and at the moment have no wish to see them gone or intention of trying to bring them down as you put it! I support my FC just like you do but I don't do it with blind faith for the people that run it. That is a healthy position for supporters to take in my view. It says we support you we share a common goal but we also know that it is possible you may have some goals that may not be in best interests of FC. E.g. You change your mind about investing and priority becomes recovery of investment howsoever it can be quickest achieved. Just to be clear though in case this provokes more hysterics I am not saying this is what is happening now but we would be wise to stay alert to anything and everything and to make sure the owners know they will not have absolute indemnity to do what they want because of blind faith from supporters. Wise shareholders of companies always question the leaders of the businesses in which they invest , it doesn't mean they don't support them. We are emotional shareholders of BRFC and we care a lot about its health and future. There is no place for blind faith.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 9:57:22 GMT
No. That's not all he said. That's just all you've paid attention to. The two things are totally different. And you have had communication from the men making the decisions. Via the chairman they employ to communicate these things. Are you happy with what SH said on Twentyman yesterday? Do you think he spoke with clarity? Sounded like he didnt really know for sure what he was talking about after admitting he had been to "several" meetings with UWE. Obviously rushed and not properly briefed. I would expected him to have been to more than several meetings with UWE within 18 months as a chairman.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Aug 4, 2017 10:03:16 GMT
Fair enough, but undermining the owners is only useful if they are bad owners. If they are good owners they need to be backed. If they are endeavouring to negotiate difficult issues with entities that don't give a f**k about the club then they need to be backed. I don't believe you get to undermine them on a whim and then back them on a whim, depending on the time of day or the particular issue. You either back them or don't. And you have chosen not to, and you have chosen to insult them. I suppose, as you have tagged them fake and believe they are bad for the club then you should continue to call them names and undermine them at every opportunity until you get rid of them. Not sure how you have come to this conclusion (on the say-so of some randomer at UWE I guess). But you go for it. If you feel they need to be brought down, then despise them and undermine them for all you're worth; go for it. Meanwhile, I will back them until I get some sort of evidence that they are bad for the club. All I have got so far is that they are good for the club, and want us to succeed. All I have got is that they are not prepared to dump a shedload of cash down the sh**ter following the half-baked 'watertight' plans that they had nothing to do with and that have already been discredited on a number of points. Wow what a hysterical tirade! Show me where I have said I'm not going to back them or I despise them. This is not black and white, or love and hate not much is. Unilateral support for anyone who runs anything is unhealthy and dangerous in fact its sycophantic. Equally opposition for the sake of it is destructive too. Up until now though I have been big a supporter of the AQ's I still back them and at the moment have no wish to see them gone or intention of trying to bring them down as you put it! I support my FC just like you do but I don't do it with blind faith for the people that run it. That is a healthy position for supporters to take in my view. It says we support you we share a common goal but we also know that it is possible you may have some goals that may not be in best interests of FC. E.g. You change your mind about investing and priority becomes recovery of investment howsoever it can be quickest achieved. Just to be clear though in case this provokes more hysterics I am not saying this is what is happening now but we would be wise to stay alert to anything and everything and to make sure the owners know they will not have absolute indemnity to do what they want because of blind faith from supporters. Wise shareholders of companies always question the leaders of the businesses in which they invest , it doesn't mean they don't support them. We are emotional shareholders of BRFC and we care a lot about its health and future. There is no place for blind faith. No, I wasn't being hysterical, I was reflecting the hysteria you have shown. It is black and white, if they are fake. You think they're fake? Don't back them. Don't have your cake and eat it. Either they're fake or they're not. Go back and read what you have posted and then call me hysterical again. Are they fake? Did they bluff, lie and bluster? Are they out of their depth? Do they have no courage or class? And you're calling me hysterical.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 10:14:45 GMT
Wow what a hysterical tirade! Show me where I have said I'm not going to back them or I despise them. This is not black and white, or love and hate not much is. Unilateral support for anyone who runs anything is unhealthy and dangerous in fact its sycophantic. Equally opposition for the sake of it is destructive too. Up until now though I have been big a supporter of the AQ's I still back them and at the moment have no wish to see them gone or intention of trying to bring them down as you put it! I support my FC just like you do but I don't do it with blind faith for the people that run it. That is a healthy position for supporters to take in my view. It says we support you we share a common goal but we also know that it is possible you may have some goals that may not be in best interests of FC. E.g. You change your mind about investing and priority becomes recovery of investment howsoever it can be quickest achieved. Just to be clear though in case this provokes more hysterics I am not saying this is what is happening now but we would be wise to stay alert to anything and everything and to make sure the owners know they will not have absolute indemnity to do what they want because of blind faith from supporters. Wise shareholders of companies always question the leaders of the businesses in which they invest , it doesn't mean they don't support them. We are emotional shareholders of BRFC and we care a lot about its health and future. There is no place for blind faith. No, I wasn't being hysterical, I was reflecting the hysteria you have shown. It is black and white, if they are fake. You think they're fake? Don't back them. Don't have your cake and eat it. Either they're fake or they're not. Go back and read what you have posted and then call me hysterical again. Are they fake? Did they bluff, lie and bluster? Are they out of their depth? Do they have no courage or class? And you're calling me hysterical. We said Antonio
|
|
|
Post by philbemmygas on Aug 4, 2017 10:24:05 GMT
Fair enough, but undermining the owners is only useful if they are bad owners. If they are good owners they need to be backed. If they are endeavouring to negotiate difficult issues with entities that don't give a f**k about the club then they need to be backed. I don't believe you get to undermine them on a whim and then back them on a whim, depending on the time of day or the particular issue. You either back them or don't. And you have chosen not to, and you have chosen to insult them. I suppose, as you have tagged them fake and believe they are bad for the club then you should continue to call them names and undermine them at every opportunity until you get rid of them. Not sure how you have come to this conclusion (on the say-so of some randomer at UWE I guess). But you go for it. If you feel they need to be brought down, then despise them and undermine them for all you're worth; go for it. Meanwhile, I will back them until I get some sort of evidence that they are bad for the club. All I have got so far is that they are good for the club, and want us to succeed. All I have got is that they are not prepared to dump a shedload of cash down the sh**ter following the half-baked 'watertight' plans that they had nothing to do with and that have already been discredited on a number of points. Wow what a hysterical tirade! Show me where I have said I'm not going to back them or I despise them. This is not black and white, or love and hate not much is. Unilateral support for anyone who runs anything is unhealthy and dangerous in fact its sycophantic. Equally opposition for the sake of it is destructive too. Up until now though I have been big a supporter of the AQ's I still back them and at the moment have no wish to see them gone or intention of trying to bring them down as you put it! I support my FC just like you do but I don't do it with blind faith for the people that run it. That is a healthy position for supporters to take in my view. It says we support you we share a common goal but we also know that it is possible you may have some goals that may not be in best interests of FC. E.g. You change your mind about investing and priority becomes recovery of investment howsoever it can be quickest achieved. Just to be clear though in case this provokes more hysterics I am not saying this is what is happening now but we would be wise to stay alert to anything and everything and to make sure the owners know they will not have absolute indemnity to do what they want because of blind faith from supporters. Wise shareholders of companies always question the leaders of the businesses in which they invest , it doesn't mean they don't support them. We are emotional shareholders of BRFC and we care a lot about its health and future. There is no place for blind faith. There is a place for blind faith, plenty put their faith in a guide dog or a human guide. Sorry just trying to defuse the whole situation, by the way are we relegated or promoted yet? Sorry I thought
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Aug 4, 2017 10:29:27 GMT
Wow what a hysterical tirade! Show me where I have said I'm not going to back them or I despise them. This is not black and white, or love and hate not much is. Unilateral support for anyone who runs anything is unhealthy and dangerous in fact its sycophantic. Equally opposition for the sake of it is destructive too. Up until now though I have been big a supporter of the AQ's I still back them and at the moment have no wish to see them gone or intention of trying to bring them down as you put it! I support my FC just like you do but I don't do it with blind faith for the people that run it. That is a healthy position for supporters to take in my view. It says we support you we share a common goal but we also know that it is possible you may have some goals that may not be in best interests of FC. E.g. You change your mind about investing and priority becomes recovery of investment howsoever it can be quickest achieved. Just to be clear though in case this provokes more hysterics I am not saying this is what is happening now but we would be wise to stay alert to anything and everything and to make sure the owners know they will not have absolute indemnity to do what they want because of blind faith from supporters. Wise shareholders of companies always question the leaders of the businesses in which they invest , it doesn't mean they don't support them. We are emotional shareholders of BRFC and we care a lot about its health and future. There is no place for blind faith. No, I wasn't being hysterical, I was reflecting the hysteria you have shown. It is black and white, if they are fake. You think they're fake? Don't back them. Don't have your cake and eat it. Either they're fake or they're not. Go back and read what you have posted and then call me hysterical again. Are they fake? Did they bluff, lie and bluster? Are they out of their depth? Do they have no courage or class? And you're calling me hysterical. My first post was deliberately provocative because I strongly feel that the supporters are owed much more of an explanation than what we got. Whether they are fake or not or whether their ONGOING intentions for the FC are good or bad remains to be seen but it needs to be questioned.,I will support them if I believe their intentions are good but not if I believe the opposite but I will never let them have free reign to do what they want without calling them out. I hope they prove me wrong and that the first post was hysterical nonsense let's ALL hope so, but until they deem to deign us with their presence it's too early to judge.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Aug 4, 2017 10:40:15 GMT
No. That's not all he said. That's just all you've paid attention to. The two things are totally different. And you have had communication from the men making the decisions. Via the chairman they employ to communicate these things. Are you happy with what SH said on Twentyman yesterday? Do you think he spoke with clarity? I'm not happy about the news but I'm satisfied with his delivery of it. The truth is commercial deals break down for lots of reasons. There may be one thing that nixed the whole deal or it might be lots of little factors. It's a bit like asking "Why did you get divorced"? If the answer isn't something like "He beats me" or "she ran off with my mate" what are you going to do? Chart the whole history of the relationship? To what end? What if doing so will prejudice a new relationship you're trying to start with someone else? What if making clear that you're beginning that new relationship will jeapordise your child custody case? What if you need time to assess the position and aren't ready to start a new relationship yet? I've gone hard on that analogy but the point is whilst it's understandable to want gritty detail it's not really appropriate to accuse people of being fake, or not forthcoming when they give you the headline news in a distilled manner such as will fit into a radio interview.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 10:53:57 GMT
I admire your faith and I'm glad you are satisfied by the answers given by SH yesterday.
Personally, I think the whole thing has been badly handled by the owners. Eighteen months to not reach an agreement is beyond belief.
|
|
|
Post by philbemmygas on Aug 4, 2017 10:54:06 GMT
Are you happy with what SH said on Twentyman yesterday? Do you think he spoke with clarity? I'm not happy about the news but I'm satisfied with his delivery of it. The truth is commercial deals break down for lots of reasons. There may be one thing that nixed the whole deal or it might be lots of little factors. It's a bit like asking "Why did you get divorced"? If the answer isn't something like "He beats me" or "she ran off with my mate" what are you going to do? Chart the whole history of the relationship? To what end? What if doing so will prejudice a new relationship you're trying to start with someone else? What if making clear that you're beginning that new relationship will jeapordise your child custody case? What if you need time to assess the position and aren't ready to start a new relationship yet? I've gone hard on that analogy but the point is whilst it's understandable to want gritty detail it's not really appropriate to accuse people of being fake, or not forthcoming when they give you the headline news in a distilled manner such as will fit into a radio interview. LJG We have clashed in the past; but you are showing a knowledge of the subject that many can't match. The OP by his outburst , proved (IMO) he was thinking rationally and it was an emotional outburst. I think he will find it increasingly difficult to justify his word in print. The coming weeks I am sure we will learn more about what transpired on Wednesday, and it will hopefully allow us to put this sordid episode behind us. UTG
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 4, 2017 10:55:01 GMT
Are you happy with what SH said on Twentyman yesterday? Do you think he spoke with clarity? Sounded like he didnt really know for sure what he was talking about after admitting he had been to "several" meetings with UWE. Obviously rushed and not properly briefed. I would expected him to have been to more than several meetings with UWE within 18 months as a chairman. He said all the meetings have been conducted with DS representatives, so i guess he was not in the loop until a deal had been done
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 4, 2017 10:55:54 GMT
No. That's not all he said. That's just all you've paid attention to. The two things are totally different. And you have had communication from the men making the decisions. Via the chairman they employ to communicate these things. Are you happy with what SH said on Twentyman yesterday? Do you think he spoke with clarity? Yes and i fully understood why we pulled the plug
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Aug 4, 2017 10:56:39 GMT
No, I wasn't being hysterical, I was reflecting the hysteria you have shown. It is black and white, if they are fake. You think they're fake? Don't back them. Don't have your cake and eat it. Either they're fake or they're not. Go back and read what you have posted and then call me hysterical again. Are they fake? Did they bluff, lie and bluster? Are they out of their depth? Do they have no courage or class? And you're calling me hysterical. My first post was deliberately provocative because I strongly feel that the supporters are owed much more of an explanation than what we got. Whether they are fake or not or whether their ONGOING intentions for the FC are good or bad remains to be seen but it needs to be questioned.,I will support them if I believe their intentions are good but not if I believe the opposite but I will never let them have free reign to do what they want without calling them out. I hope they prove me wrong and that the first post was hysterical nonsense let's ALL hope so, but until they deem to deign us with their presence it's too early to judge. Well if it remains to be seen and it's too soon to judge why are you calling them fake? You seem to be backtracking. So, are they fake? Did they bluff, lie and bluster? Are they out of their depth? Do they have no courage or class? Come on, you're the one talking about integrity and answering questions properly, you can't even answer a few simple ones about statements you made yesterday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 11:05:22 GMT
You talk about integrity, class..........
Issuing an official statement at 11pm on a Wednesday night. Rushing out the totally unprepared Chairman as a sacrificial lamb to face the music, when it appears he was not involved in the negotiations. Setting a cut-off date for the negotiations when the President was on holiday. Setting the cut-off date knowing that the story would break days before the new season. Four days after the cut-off date, still not a word from anyone at Dwayne Sports.
Class.....Integrity.......You decide.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Aug 4, 2017 11:08:53 GMT
You talk about integrity, class.......... Issuing an official statement at 11pm on a Wednesday night. Rushing out the totally unprepared Chairman as a sacrificial lamb to face the music, when it appears he was not involved in the negotiations. Setting a cut-off date for the negotiations when the President was on holiday. Setting the cut-off date knowing that the story would break days before the new season. Four days after the cut-off date, still not a word from anyone at Dwayne Sports. Class.....Integrity.......You decide. I don't see that as a class integrity issue. That seems to me to be an organisational, planning, leak, f**k-up, competence issue. I don't think anyone's claiming the club has handled the news-break well.
|
|
|
Post by syg on Aug 4, 2017 11:09:37 GMT
I'm just disappointed with the PR over the stadium. I think somebody should apologise for issuing a panic statement and the way it was handled after. Its easy "sorry, the communication ref the stadium was poor, we apologise, it won't happen again, we are all learning, utg, onwards and upwards". Simples.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 4, 2017 11:09:55 GMT
You talk about integrity, class.......... Issuing an official statement at 11pm on a Wednesday night. Rushing out the totally unprepared Chairman as a sacrificial lamb to face the music, when it appears he was not involved in the negotiations. Setting a cut-off date for the negotiations when the President was on holiday. Setting the cut-off date knowing that the story would break days before the new season. Four days after the cut-off date, still not a word from anyone at Dwayne Sports. Class.....Integrity.......You decide. Both.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 4, 2017 11:10:43 GMT
I'm just disappointed with the PR over the stadium. I think somebody should apologise for issuing a panic statement and the way it was handled after. Its easy "sorry, the communication ref the stadium was poor, we apologise, it won't happen again, we are all learning, utg, onwards and upwards". Simples. I'm sure that will happen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 11:23:14 GMT
Sounded like he didnt really know for sure what he was talking about after admitting he had been to "several" meetings with UWE. Obviously rushed and not properly briefed. I would expected him to have been to more than several meetings with UWE within 18 months as a chairman. He said all the meetings have been conducted with DS representatives, so i guess he was not in the loop until a deal had been done Surely a Chairman should be 'in the loop' at all times? Especially if he is the one carrying the can if things go south.
|
|
|
Post by toddy1953 on Aug 4, 2017 12:32:48 GMT
For me, there are so many tools of communication nowadays, but actual communication is p*ss poor. I have said previously that I think FTB could have worded things a bit better in his OP, but like most of us on here, is probably extremely passionate about our club and it's easy for all of us to sit behind our keyboards & vent our passion. I for one have been someone with blind faith about our owners, but I must say I think the handling of the UWE announcement was appalling as was SH interview on GT show. I mention passion a lot as I think supporting the Gas is a passion, I don't expect SH to show passion, or DS for that matter, but I expected sincere empathy from him. I expected an apology on behalf of DS for the way & the timing of the announcement - even a loan signing gets the hour warning on the website. Also, an apology for the leak, as if it was DS lawyers, that claim they sent the heads of terms to UWE with the deadline, who did they inform outside of DS, that leaked it to the guy who posted on FB? Whoever it is would have breached some sort of confidence and should be removed from their role. Also, on the face of things UWE have said they are surprised at the decision & they want the stadium to happen, SH has said there wasn't a financial reason for not going ahead, and the issue re lease or freehold had been sorted, and he wishes UWE had been 'warmer' 14 months ago, we the fans (well most) wanted it, the planning permission is there, so why did it not happen? We will probably never know the truth. I can think of previous owners we have had, that would have been ripped apart on here if this had been handled like this on their watch, why should the present owners not be brought to task? Personally, I think they are a decent bunch, although I am absolutely gutted re the stadium. It's obvious that the deal had to be right for the owners first & foremost and from UWE standpoint it had to be the best deal for them. Unfortunately, no one around the table had the real passion we have for the club, and we were just a 'pawn in their game' (no ban please) I just hope they get cracking with the training ground plans ASAP, and find somewhere new for a stadium - but I probably will take thing with a pinch of salt from now on & be less trusting. UTG
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 12:39:39 GMT
For me, there are so many tools of communication nowadays, but actual communication is p*ss poor. I have said previously that I think FTB could have worded things a bit better in his OP, but like most of us on here, is probably extremely passionate about our club and it's easy for all of us to sit behind our keyboards & vent our passion. I for one have been someone with blind faith about our owners, but I must say I think the handling of the UWE announcement was appalling as was SH interview on GT show. I mention passion a lot as I think supporting the Gas is a passion, I don't expect SH to show passion, or DS for that matter, but I expected sincere empathy from him. I expected an apology on behalf of DS for the way & the timing of the announcement - even a loan signing gets the hour warning on the website. Also, an apology for the leak, as if it was DS lawyers, that claim they sent the heads of terms to UWE with the deadline, who did they inform outside of DS, that leaked it to the guy who posted on FB? Whoever it is would have breached some sort of confidence and should be removed from their role. Also, on the face of things UWE have said they are surprised at the decision & they want the stadium to happen, SH has said there wasn't a financial reason for not going ahead, and the issue re lease or freehold had been sorted, and he wishes UWE had been 'warmer' 14 months ago, we the fans (well most) wanted it, the planning permission is there, so why did it not happen? We will probably never know the truth. I can think of previous owners we have had, that would have been ripped apart on here if this had been handled like this on their watch, why should the present owners not be brought to task? Personally, I think they are a decent bunch, although I am absolutely gutted re the stadium. It's obvious that the deal had to be right for the owners first & foremost and from UWE standpoint it had to be the best deal for them. Unfortunately, no one around the table had the real passion we have for the club, and we were just a 'pawn in their game' (no ban please) I just hope they get cracking with the training ground plans ASAP, and find somewhere new for a stadium - but I probably will take thing with a pinch of salt from now on & be less trusting. UTG Just this alone would show they are in it for the long haul. At the moment its just a piece of land (bought) with fencing (not bought) around it.
|
|